The Brisbane Courier (Qld. : 1864 - 1933)(about) |
Previous issue
Tuesday 18 July 1899
Next issue
Send to:
|
No corrections yet
SUPHEME COURT,
Monday, July 17.
IN CIVIL JURISDICTION.
Before his Honour Mr. Justice Chubb.
Hendió and Another v. Qualtrough ana
Others.
Mr. Stumm (instructed by Messrs. Atthow and M'Gregor) for the plaintiffs ; Mr. BJ. M. Lilley (instructed by Messrs. Roberta and Roberts) for tho defendants.
This was an action in which judgment bad been reserved. It was tried at the last Civil Sittings of the court, before his Honour and a jury of four.
His Honour delivered a written judgment. The plaintiffs, Lucy Kendle and William J. Heirdsficld, he stated, sought to enforce against the defendant (1) an alleged re- sulting trust in land in their favour ; (2) an express trust of land in their favour, and also a parol declaration of trust in their favour of the. sum of £350 each. The issues of fact had been tried by a jury, and as regard claims 1 and 2 had been found against both plaintiffs, and as regards 3 against the plaintiff, Wm. J. Heirdsficld, and as regards Lucy Hendió, the jury had found that on or about December, 1890, the defendants had declared them- selves to be trustees for her of a Bum ot £350 and trustas of certain lands ; that the defendants pi id her £s:5 of that sum. and oM'tnded iii' w mailling £325 in the purchase for 1."J- 11 ,v |ii»cc of land which had been set'lo-l by ilfffi.dants In trust for her for life, ./iih remainder to her chil- dren in fee, ami willi ultluiate remainder in fee to defendants ; ana that the £25 and the land so purchased and settled were not a gift from defendants. Ho (his Hon- our) was of opinion that the evidence show- ed thero was a trust, not for a sum oi money simply, but for a sum of money to bo laid out by the donor ia land for the benefit bf the donor, or, in other words, a trust of land oí the value of £360. As a trust of that nature was requlredbs the statute of frauds to be evidenced by writing, the plaintiffs' case failed for want of such evidence. The jury had not gone far enough in declaring inasmuch as that they had not proved the whole of the trust.
There would thereforo be judgment for defendants, with costs upon the whole of
the case.
Millers v. Millers and Another.
Mr. Lukin (instructed by Messrs. Morris and Fletcher) for the plaintiff ; Mr. Cham- bers (Messrs. Chambers, Bruce, and M'Nab) for the defendant ; Mr. M'Nab (Messrs. Winter and M'Nab) for the co
defendant.
This was a motion for the name of the co-defendant, W. J. Mclaren, who died on 20th Juno last, to be struck out. The ac- tion was one for divorce.
His Honour made np order accordingly, but reserved the question of the defendants' costs to be dealt with ttf the Chief Justlç«,